Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Feasibility of 5-fluorouracil pharmacokinetic monitoring using the My-5FU PCM™ system in a quaternary oncology centre

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

5-Fluorouracil (5FU) drug exposure correlates with treatment response and toxicity in cancer patients. Dosing is based upon body surface area which does not correlate with 5FU pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics. Therapeutic drug monitoring has enabled real-time 5FU dose adjustments: reducing toxicity with increased efficacy. The aim of this study was to assess feasibility of a 5FU monitoring service utilising a commercial kit in a quaternary cancer centre and to compare PK parameters to previously published studies.

Methods

Cancer patients receiving continuous infusional (CI) 5FU with ECOG PS 0–2, and adequate organ function, were eligible. Patients had blood samples taken at t = 0, mid infusion (if feasible) then 2 h pre infusion end. 5FU levels were measured using a commercial kit (My-5FU PCM™). A feasibility questionnaire was completed by trial nurses and toxicity data were recorded at baseline and at the commencement of the next cycle. 5FU pharmacokinetic exposure parameters were calculated.

Results

Twenty patients (12 male; 8 female), median age 62, (range 37–71) had samples taken. Twenty (100%) feasibility forms were available for assessment. Blood samples were taken at 51/69 (74%) specified time points. Ease of sample processing was recorded as easy in all 20 patients. Patient compliance with scheduled visits was 18/20 (90%). One form noted other difficulties with predicting end of infusion time. 19/20 patients had blood samples analysed. Mean measured 5FU AUC (0-Tlast) for 5FU 1 g/m2 with platinum: 35.8 h mg/L (range 28.56–44.26), mean Css 372.2 µg/L (range 297.5–461.0); 5FU 600 mg/m2 with platinum: 12.42 h mg/L (range 6.91–18.29), mean Css 111.0 µg/L (72.0–190.5) and 5FU 2400 mg/m2 as part of FOLFOX ± bevacizumab: 14.75 h mg/L (range 6.74–22.93), mean Css 320.70 µg/L (range 146.5–498.5). One patient had grade 4 neutropenia and one patient without PK parameters experienced febrile neutropenia (grade 4 neutropenia). Mucositis was observed in two patients: [5FU/platinum (1), grade 1, FOXFOX ± bevacizumab (1) grade 1]. Diarrhoea was reported in three patients [5FU/platinum (2) grade 1–2, FOXFOX ± bevacizumab (1) grade 1].

Conclusion

Therapeutic 5FU drug monitoring was feasible using commercial kits and analysers and hence warrants development as a routine standard of care in cancer patients. The variability in the 5FU exposure parameters is consistent with other studies using the My 5FU PCM kit.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dasmahapatra KS, Citrin P, Hill G, Yee R, Mohit-Tabatabai M, Rush B Jr (1985) A prospective evaluation of 5-fluorouracil plus cisplatin in advanced squamous-cell cancer of the head and neck. J Clin Oncol 3(11):1486–1489

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Adelstein DJ (2003) Systemic chemotherapy for squamous cell head and neck cancer. Expert Opin Pharmacother 4(12):2151–2163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Adelstein DJ, LeBlanc M (2006) Does induction chemotherapy have a role in the management of locoregionally advanced squamous cell head and neck cancer? J Clin Oncol 24(17):2624–2628

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Goldenberg D, Sciubba J, Koch WM (2006) Cystic metastasis from head and neck squamous cell cancer: a distinct disease variant? Head Neck 28(7):633–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Vermorken JB, Mesia R, Rivera F, Remenar E, Kawecki A, Rottey S et al (2008) Platinum-based chemotherapy plus cetuximab in head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 359(11):1116–1127

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Calais G, Alfonsi M, Bardet E, Sire C, Germain T, Bergerot P et al (1999) Randomized trial of radiation therapy versus concomitant chemotherapy and radiation therapy for advanced-stage oropharynx carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 91(24):2081–2086

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Poon MA, O’Connell MJ, Wieand HS, Krook JE, Gerstner JB, Tschetter LK et al (1991) Biochemical modulation of fluorouracil with leucovorin: confirmatory evidence of improved therapeutic efficacy in advanced colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 9(11):1967–1972

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. de Gramont AD, Figer A, Seymour M, Homerin M, Hmissi A, Cassidy J et al (2000) Leucovorin and fluorouracil with or without oxaliplatin as first-line treatment in advanced colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 18(16):2938–2947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Douillard J, Cunningham D, Roth A, Navarro M, James R, Karasek P et al (2000) Irinotecan combined with fluorouracil compared with fluorouracil alone as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 355(9209):1041–1047

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Baker SD, Verweij J, Rowinsky EK, Donehower RC, Schellens JH, Grochow LB et al (2002) Role of body surface area in dosing of investigational anticancer agents in adults, 1991–2001. J Natl Cancer Inst 94(24):1883–1888

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fety R, Rolland F, Barberi-Heyob M, Hardouin A, Campion L, Conroy T et al (1998) Clinical impact of pharmacokinetically-guided dose adaptation of 5-fluorouracil: results from a multicentric randomized trial in patients with locally advanced head and neck carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res 4(9):2039–2045

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Undevia SD, Gomez-Abuin G, Ratain MJ (2005) Pharmacokinetic variability of anticancer agents. Nat Rev Cancer 5(6):447–458

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gurney H (1996) Dose calculation of anticancer drugs: a review of the current practice and introduction of an alternative. J Clin Oncol 14(9):2590–2611

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Felici A, Verweij J, Sparreboom A (2002) Dosing strategies for anticancer drugs: the good, the bad and body-surface area. Eur J Cancer 38(13):1677–1684

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Meta-Analysis Group In C, Levy E, Piedbois P, Buyse M, Pignon JP, Rougier P et al (1998) Toxicity of fluorouracil in patients with advanced colorectal cancer: effect of administration schedule and prognostic factors. J Clin Oncol 16(11):3537–3541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Harris BE, Song R, Soong SJ, Diasio RB (1990) Relationship between dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity and plasma 5-fluorouracil levels with evidence for circadian variation of enzyme activity and plasma drug levels in cancer patients receiving 5-fluorouracil by protracted continuous infusion. Cancer Res 50(1):197–201

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jacobs BA, Deenen MJ, Pluim D, van Hasselt JG, Krahenbuhl MD, van Geel RM et al (2016) Pronounced between-subject and circadian variability in thymidylate synthase and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase enzyme activity in human volunteers. Br J Clin Pharmacol 82(3):706–716

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee AM, Shi Q, Pavey E et al (2014) DPYD variants as predictors of 5-fluorouracil toxicity in adjuvant colon cancer treatment (NCCTG N0147). J Natl Cancer Inst 106(12):dju298. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju298

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Meulendijks D, Henricks LM, Sonke GS, Deenen MJ, Froehlich TK, Amstutz U et al (2015) Clinical relevance of DPYD variants c.1679T > G, c.1236G > A/HapB3, and c.1601G > A as predictors of severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol 16(16):1639–1650

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Harris BE, Carpenter JT, Diasio RB (1991) Severe 5-fluorouracil toxicity secondary to dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency. A potentially more common pharmacogenetic syndrome. Cancer 68(3):499–501

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Diasio RB, Beavers TL, Carpenter JT (1988) Familial deficiency of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase. Biochemical basis for familial pyrimidinemia and severe 5-fluorouracil-induced toxicity. J Clin Invest 81(1):47–51

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Deenen MJ, Meulendijks D, Cats A, Sechterberger MK, Severens JL, Boot H et al (2016) Upfront genotyping of DPYD*2A to individualize fluoropyrimidine therapy: a safety and cost analysis. J Clin Oncol 34(3):227–234

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. van Kuilenburg AB (2004) Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase and the efficacy and toxicity of 5-fluorouracil. Eur J Cancer 40(7):939–950

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. van Kuilenburg AB, Haasjes J, Richel DJ, Zoetekouw L, Van Lenthe H, De Abreu RA et al (2000) Clinical implications of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency in patients with severe 5-fluorouracil-associated toxicity: identification of new mutations in the DPD gene. Clin Cancer Res 6(12):4705–4712

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Di Paolo A, Danesi R, Falcone A, Cionini L, Vannozzi F, Masi G et al (2001) Relationship between 5-fluorouracil disposition, toxicity and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity in cancer patients. Ann Oncol 12(9):1301–1306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Van Kuilenburg AB, Meinsma R, Zoetekouw L, Van Gennip AH (2002) Increased risk of grade IV neutropenia after administration of 5-fluorouracil due to a dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency: high prevalence of the IVS14 + 1g > a mutation. Int J Cancer 101(3):253–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Saif MW, Choma A, Salamone SJ, Chu E (2009) Pharmacokinetically guided dose adjustment of 5-fluorouracil: a rational approach to improving therapeutic outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst 101(22):1543–1552

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Au JL-S, Rustum YM, Ledesma E, Mittelman A, Creaven PJ (1982) Clinical pharmacological studies of concurrent infusion of 5-fluorouracil and thymidine in treatment of colorectal carcinomas. Cancer Res 42(7):2930–2937

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. van Groeningen CJ, Pinedo HM, Heddes J, Kok RM, de Jong AP, Wattel E et al (1988) Pharmacokinetics of 5-fluorouracil assessed with a sensitive mass spectrometric method in patients on a dose escalation schedule. Cancer Res 48(23):6956–6961

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Yoshida T, Araki E, Iigo M, Fujii T, Yoshino M, Shimada Y et al (1990) Clinical significance of monitoring serum levels of 5-fluorouracil by continuous infusion in patients with advanced colonic cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 26(5):352–354

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Trump DL, Egorin MJ, Forrest A, Willson J, Remick S, Tutsch KD (1991) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis of fluorouracil during 72-h continuous infusion with and without dipyridamole. J Clin Oncol 9(11):2027–2035

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Gamelin E, Boisdron-Celle M, Delva R, Regimbeau C, Cailleux P, Alleaume C et al (1998) Long-term weekly treatment of colorectal metastatic cancer with fluorouracil and leucovorin: results of a multicentric prospective trial of fluorouracil dosage optimization by pharmacokinetic monitoring in 152 patients. J Clin Oncol 16(4):1470–1478

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ychou M, Duffour J, Pinguet F, Kramar A, Joulia J, Topart D et al (1998) Individual 5FU-dose adaptation schedule using bimonthly pharmacokinetically modulated LV5FU2 regimen: a feasibility study in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Anticancer Res 19(3B):2229–2235

    Google Scholar 

  34. Ychou M, Duffour J, Kramar A, Debrigode C, Gourgou S, Bressolle F et al (2003) Individual 5-FU dose adaptation in metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a phase II study using a bimonthly pharmacokinetically intensified LV5FU2 regimen. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 52(4):282–290

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Hillcoat B, McCulloch P, Figueredo A, Ehsan MH, Rosenfeld J (1978) Clinical response and plasma levels of 5-fluorouracil in patients with colonic cancer treated by drug infusion. Br J Cancer 38(6):719

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Di Paolo A, Lencioni M, Amatori F, Di Donato S, Bocci G, Orlandini C et al (2008) 5-fluorouracil pharmacokinetics predicts disease-free survival in patients administered adjuvant chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. Clin Cancer Res 14(9):2749–2755

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Gamelin E, Delva R, Jacob J, Merrouche Y, Raoul JL, Pezet D et al (2008) Individual fluorouracil dose adjustment based on pharmacokinetic follow-up compared with conventional dosage: results of a multicenter randomized trial of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 26(13):2099–2105

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Capitain O, Asevoaia A, Boisdron-Celle M, Poirier A-L, Morel A, Gamelin E (2012) Individual fluorouracil dose adjustment in FOLFOX based on pharmacokinetic follow-up compared with conventional body-area-surface dosing: a phase II, proof-of-concept study. Clin Colorectal Cancer 11(4):263–267

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Kline CLB, Schiccitano A, Zhu J, Beachler C, Sheikh H, Harvey HA et al (2014) Personalized dosing via pharmacokinetic monitoring of 5-fluorouracil might reduce toxicity in early-or late-stage colorectal cancer patients treated with infusional 5-Fluorouracil-based chemotherapy regimens. Clin Colorectal Cancer 13(2):119–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Saam J, Critchfield GC, Hamilton SA, Roa BB, Wenstrup RJ, Kaldate RR (2011) Body surface area-based dosing of 5-Fluoruracil results in extensive interindividual variability in 5-Fluorouracil exposure in colorectal cancer patients on FOLFOX regimens. Clin Colorectal Cancer 10(3):203–206

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Denda T, Kanda M, Morita Y, Kim HM, Kashiwada T, Matsuda C et al (2016) Pharmacokinetic dose adjustment of 5-FU in modified FOLFOX7 plus bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer in Japanese patients: a-JUST phase II clinical trial. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 78(6):1253–1261

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Wilhelm M, Mueller L, Miller MC, Link K, Holdenrieder S, Bertsch T et al (2016) Prospective, multicenter study of 5-Fluorouracil therapeutic drug monitoring in metastatic colorectal cancer treated in routine clinical practice. Clin Colorectal Cancer 15(4):381–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Goel G, Sehgal R, Meisner DJ, Sun M, Pasricha G, Chu E et al (2015) Therapeutic drug monitoring of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in the treatment of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). J Clin Oncol 33(3 suppl):563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Braiteh FS, Salamone SJ, Li Y, Courtney JB, Duda M, Diamond S et al (2014) Pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided optimization of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) exposure in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients: US-based clinical practices experience. J Clin Oncol 32(15 suppl):3574

    Google Scholar 

  45. Patel JN, O’Neil BH, Deal AM, Ibrahim JG, Sherrill GB, Olajide OA et al (2014) A community-based multicenter trial of pharmacokinetically guided 5-fluorouracil dosing for personalized colorectal cancer therapy. Oncologist 19(9):959–965

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Michael M, Gibbs P, Smith R, Godwood A, Oliver S, Tebbutt N (2009) Open-label phase I trial of vandetanib in combination with mFOLFOX6 in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Investig New Drugs 27(3):253–261

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Michael M, Zalcberg J, Gibbs P, Lipton L, Gouillou M, Jefford M et al (2013) A phase I trial of imatinib in combination with mFOLFOX6–bevacizumab in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 71(2):321–330

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Thyss A, Milano G, Renée N, Vallicioni J, Schneider M, Demard F (1986) Clinical pharmacokinetic study of 5-FU in continuous 5-day infusions for head and neck cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 16(1):64–66

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Santini J, Milano G, Thyss A, Renee N, Viens P, Ayela P et al (1989) 5-FU therapeutic monitoring with dose adjustment leads to an improved therapeutic index in head and neck cancer. Br J Cancer 59(2):287

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Zahnd D, Aebi S, Rusterholz S, Fey M, Borner M (1999) A randomized crossover trial assessing patient preference for two different types of portable infusion-pump devices. Ann Oncol 10(6):727–729

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Ilfeld BM, Morey TE, Enneking FK (2003) Delivery rate accuracy of portable, bolus-capable infusion pumps used for patient-controlled continuous regional analgesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med 28(1):17–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Kaye T (1994) Prolonged infusion times with disponible elastomeric, infusion devices. AJHP Am J Hosp Pharm 51(4):533–534

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Veal DF, Altman CE, McKinnon BT, Fillingim O (1995) Evaluation of flow rates for six disposable infusion devices. Am J Health Syst Pharm 52(5):500–504

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Ackermann M, Maier S, Ing H, Bonnabry P (2007) Evaluation of the design and reliability of three elastomeric and one mechanical infusers. J Oncol Pharm Practice 13(2):77–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. LeReiger MBT, Martin D, Bessesworth J, Tobias JD (2014) Comparison of flow rate accuracy and consistency between the on-Q, baxter, and ambu pain devices. World J Anesthesiol 3(1):119–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Gamelin EC, Danquechin-Dorval EM, Dumesnil YF, Maillart PJ, Goudier M, Burtin PC et al (1996) Relationship between 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) dose intensity and therapeutic response in patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving infusional therapy containing 5-FU. Cancer 77(3):441–451

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Diasio RB, Harris BE (1989) Clinical pharmacology of 5-fluorouracil. Clin Pharmacokinet 16(4):215–237

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Blaschke M, Cameron S, Emami K, Blumberg J, Wegner U, Nischwitz M et al (2011) Measurement of 5-FU plasma levels in patients with advanced cancer: correct approach to practical procedures is essential. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 49(1):83

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. van Kuilenburg AB, Hausler P, Schalhorn A, Tanck MW, Proost JH, Terborg C et al (2012) Evaluation of 5-fluorouracil pharmacokinetics in cancer patients with a c.1905 + 1G > A mutation in DPYD by means of a Bayesian limited sampling strategy. Clin Pharmacokinet 51(3):163–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Freeman K, Connock M, Cummins E, Gurung T, Taylor-Phillips S, Court R et al (2015) Fluorouracil plasma monitoring: systematic review and economic evaluation of the My5-FU assay for guiding dose adjustment in patients receiving fluorouracil chemotherapy by continuous infusion. Health Technol Assess (Winch Engl) 19(91):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. ClinicalTrials.gov Study comparing optimized 5-FU dosing and standard dosing in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with FOLFOX6 (PROFUSE)

  62. Grothey A, Van Cutsem E, Sobrero A, Siena S, Falcone A, Ychou M et al (2013) Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet 381(9863):303–312

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Annette M. Lim

    Present address: Department of Medical Oncology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Australia

  2. John R. Zalcberg

    Present address: Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacy, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag 1, A’Beckett Street, Melbourne, 8006, Australia

    Michael Moloney

  2. Department of Pathology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia

    David Faulkner

  3. Centre of Biostatistics and Clinical Trials, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia

    Emma Link

  4. Department of Haematology and Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia

    Danny Rischin, Ben Solomon, Annette M. Lim, John R. Zalcberg, Michael Jefford & Michael Michael

  5. Sir Peter MacCallum Department of Oncology, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia

    Emma Link

Authors
  1. Michael Moloney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Faulkner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Danny Rischin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ben Solomon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Annette M. Lim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. John R. Zalcberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michael Jefford
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Michael Michael
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Moloney.

Ethics declarations

Ethical standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution and the national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moloney, M., Faulkner, D., Link, E. et al. Feasibility of 5-fluorouracil pharmacokinetic monitoring using the My-5FU PCM™ system in a quaternary oncology centre. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 82, 865–876 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-018-3679-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-018-3679-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation